Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
No TasWind Farm Group Inc v Hydro-Electric Corporation (No 3) [2014] FCA 349 Citation: No TasWind Farm Group Inc v Hydro-Electric Corporation (No 3) [2014] FCA 349
Parties: NO TASWIND FARM GROUP INC v HYDRO-ELECTRIC CORPORATION
File number(s): TAD 33 of 2013
Judge(s): KERR J
Date of judgment: 8 April 2014
Catchwords: COSTS – costs of application for security for costs
Cases cited: Newtimber (Operations) Pty Ltd v Tarong Energy Corporation Limited (No 2) [2011] FCA 363 No TasWind Farm Group Inc v Hydro-Electric Corporation (No 2) [2014] FCA 348
Date of hearing: 3 and 4 March 2014
Date of last submissions: 6 March 2014
Place: Hobart
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 20
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr A Wood
Solicitor for the Applicant: Mr J Walker
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr D Barclay
Solicitor for the Respondent: Page Seager Lawyers
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA TASMANIA DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION TAD 33 of 2013
BETWEEN: NO TASWIND FARM GROUP INC
Applicant
AND: HYDRO-ELECTRIC CORPORATION
Respondent
JUDGE: KERR J DATE OF ORDER: 8 APRIL 2014 WHERE MADE: HOBART
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The costs of the Hydro-Electric Corporation of and incidental to its application for security for costs are the Hydro-Electric Corporation's costs in the cause. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA TASMANIA DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION TAD 33 of 2013
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate